Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31383914›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Myocardial strain assessed by feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance in patients with a variety of cardiovascular diseases - A comparison with echocardiography.

Kasper Pryds, Anders Hostrup Larsen, Mona Sahlholdt Hansen, Anne Yoon Krogh Grøndal, Rasmus Stilling Tougaard, Nils Henrik Hansson, Tor Skibsted Clemmensen, Brian Bridal Løgstrup, Henrik Wiggers, Won Yong Kim and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Prospective electrocardiographic and cardiovascular magnetic resonance alterations in the UK Biobank coronavirus disease 2019 repeat imaging study.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Kasper PrydsDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. kpryds@clin.au.dk.
Anders Hostrup LarsenDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Mona Sahlholdt HansenDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Anne Yoon Krogh GrøndalDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Rasmus Stilling TougaardDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Nils Henrik HanssonDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Tor Skibsted ClemmensenDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Brian Bridal LøgstrupDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Henrik WiggersDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Won Yong KimDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Hans Erik BøtkerDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Roni Ranghøj NielsenDepartment of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Myocardial deformation assessed by speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) is increasingly used for diagnosis, monitoring and prognosis in patients with clinical and pre-clinical cardiovascular diseases. Feature tracking cardiac magnetic resonance (FT-CMR) also allows myocardial deformation analysis. To clarify whether the two modalities can be used interchangeably, we compared myocardial deformation analysis by FT-CMR with STE in patients with a variety of cardiovascular diseases and healthy subjects. We included 40 patients and 10 healthy subjects undergoing cardiac magnetic resonance and echocardiographic examination for left ventricular volumetric assessment. We studied patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (n = 10), acute perimyocarditis (n = 10), aortic valve stenosis (n = 10), and previous heart transplantation (n = 10) by global longitudinal (GLS), radial (GRS) and circumferential strain (GCS). Myocardial deformation analysis by FT-CMR was feasible in all but one participant. While GLS, GRS and GCS measured by FT-CMR correlated overall with STE (r = 0.74 and p < 0.001, r = 0.58 and p < 0.001, and r = 0.76 and p < 0.001), the correlations were not consistent within subgroups. GLS was systematically lower, whereas GRS and GCS were higher by FT-CMR compared to STE (p = 0.04 and p < 0.0001). Inter- and intra-observer reproducibility were comparable for FT-CMR and STE overall and across subgroups. In conclusion, myocardial deformation can be evaluated using FT-CMR applied to routine cine-CMR images in patients with a variety of cardiovascular diseases. However, correlation between FT-CMR and STE was modest and agreement was not optimal due to systematic bias regarding GLS and GCS. Consequently, FT-CMR and STE should not be used interchangeably for myocardial strain evaluation.

Indexed as

AgedCardiovascular DiseasesEchocardiographyFemaleHeartHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedMyocardium

Identifiers

PMID31383914
PMCPMC6683180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.